linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.26, PAT and AMD family 6

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080507231042.GN18516@elf.ucw.cz>
Date:	Thu, 8 May 2008 01:10:43 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
	Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, hpa@...or.com,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.26, PAT and AMD family 6

On Thu 2008-05-08 01:02:52, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 8 May 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Wed 2008-05-07 15:22:37, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz> wrote:
> > > >  3) copy&paste code remained in the patch
> > > 
> > > i thought to keep the stub so could add more other stuff in the switch
> > > like 64 bit
> > 
> > This is _not_ good enough reason to copy&paste. Just do it like this:
> > 
> > >         switch (c->x86_vendor) {
> > >         case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
> > >                 early_init_amd(c);
> > >                 break;
> > >         case X86_VENDOR_INTEL:
> > >                 early_init_intel(c);
> > >                 break;
> > >         case X86_VENDOR_CENTAUR:
> > >                 early_init_centaur(c);
> > >                 break;
> > >         }
> > 
> > #         clear_cpu_cap(c, X86_FEATURE_PAT);
> > #
> > #         switch (c->x86_vendor) {
> > #         case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
> > #                if (c->x86 >= 0xf && c->x86 <= 0x11)
> > #                         set_cpu_cap(c, X86_FEATURE_PAT);
> > #                 break;
> > #         case X86_VENDOR_INTEL:
> > #                 if (c->x86 == 0xF || (c->x86 == 6 && c->x86_model >= 15))
> > #                         set_cpu_cap(c, X86_FEATURE_PAT);
> > #                 break;
> > #         }
> > 
> > And then, factor out code marked # into separate function, and call it
> > from all three places.
> 
> And while you are at it, why don't you send a patch which makes this
> all go away instead of wasting time producing pseudo code?

Because I expect Ingo & Yinghai to do the work, and then test it, and
then add changelog, and then commit it. I expect Yinghai to learn how
to use functions in the process.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/